Re: Change definition of URL to normatively reference IRI specification using a well-defined interface


I'd like to cover two points.  The first is that the IRI working group
agreed during the last
meeting to use an issue tracker as the method for raising, describing,
and resolving issues;
that needs to be confirmed by the list, which will happen after the
circulation of the minutes
(hopefully later today).  I don't anticipate any resistance on the
list to using the issue tracker
method, so my understanding is that the correct next step will be to
describe this issue
in a way that we can track.  My strong (personal) preference is that
we take some time
on the description here as well as on the splitting of the
issue/issues into resolvable chunks.
An issue like "resolve difference between doc 1 and doc2" doesn't
really help with two
specs of this complexity and length.  When the issue text is ready,
send it to Marc and
me, and it will get entered at

The second point is that we need to be really, really (okay, one more:
 really) careful
on terminology here.  This working group has folks coming from a
variety of backgrounds,
ranging from DNS implementors, to folks working on multiple
application layer protocols,
to the occasional information theory/graph theory hobbyist.  A term
like "resolve" has
multiple meanings in this context and in the contexts in which IRIs
are used.  Both in
the issue tracker and in the ensuing discussion, we have to be as
clear as possible on
both the context and the related meaning, or we will spin our wheels.



Received on Thursday, 8 April 2010 16:32:11 UTC